Background
In cancer care, shared decision-making (SDM) is especially relevant as different treatment options have a different impact on prognosis and patients’ quality of life. However, evidence ...suggests that SDM is not routinely practiced. Furthermore, literature is mostly focussed on the outpatient setting. This study explored healthcare providers’ perspectives on SDM for oncology inpatients and identified barriers and facilitators.
Method
In this qualitative study, focus groups and semi-structured interviews were held with five nurses, eleven residents, four oncologists, and two healthcare managers caring for oncology inpatients of the Elisabeth-TweeSteden hospital.
Results
Healthcare professionals do not always clearly state when a decision is required. On a patient level, comprehension barriers, language barrier, and distraction by emotions or sickness are recognized as barriers for adequate patient’s communication. On a healthcare professional level, having awareness to inform about choices, being able to transfer this information, connecting to the patient, having substantial experience, and a good patient-physician relationship were facilitators. On an organizational, level, time, private rooms, continuity in care, and suboptimal use of the electronic health record were barriers.
Conclusion
While SDM is recognized and valued, its implementation is inconsistent. Addressing the several barriers found and optimizing the facilitators is imperative. A start could be by raising awareness for SDM in the inpatient setting, adding SDM as part of the care pathway, stating to patients when a decision is required, reporting on the SDM process in the electronic health record, and describing the nurses’ role in SDM.
Resistance to antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as sunitinib is an important clinical problem, but its underlying mechanisms are largely unknown. We analyzed tumor sunitinib levels in ...mice and patients and studied sensitivity and resistance mechanisms to sunitinib.
Intratumoral and plasma sunitinib concentrations in mice and patients were determined. Sunitinib exposure on tumor cell proliferation was examined. Resistant tumor cells were derived by continuous exposure and studied for alterations in intracellular sunitinib accumulation and activity.
Intratumoral concentrations of sunitinib in mice and patients were 10.9 ± 0.5 and 9.5 ± 2.4 μmol/L, respectively, whereas plasma concentrations were 10-fold lower, 1.0 ± 0.1 and 0.3 ± 0.1 μmol/L, respectively. Sunitinib inhibited tumor cell growth at clinically relevant concentrations in vitro, with IC(50) values of 1.4 to 2.3 μmol/L. Continuous exposure to sunitinib resulted in resistance of 786-O renal and HT-29 colon cancer cells. Fluorescent microscopy revealed intracellular sunitinib distribution to acidic lysosomes, which were significantly higher expressed in resistant cells. A 1.7- to 2.5-fold higher sunitinib concentration in resistant cells was measured because of increased lysosomal sequestration. Despite the higher intracellular sunitinib accumulation, levels of the key signaling p-Akt and p-ERK 1/2 were unaffected and comparable with untreated parental cells, indicating reduced effectiveness of sunitinib.
We report that sunitinib inhibits tumor cell proliferation at clinically relevant concentrations and found lysosomal sequestration to be a novel mechanism of sunitinib resistance. This finding warrants clinical evaluation whether targeting lysosomal function will overcome sunitinib resistance.
Purpose
To gain more insight into the course of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and its impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a population-based sample of colorectal ...cancer (CRC) patients up to 2 years after diagnosis.
Methods
All newly diagnosed CRC patients from four hospitals in the Netherlands were eligible for participation in an ongoing prospective cohort study. Patients (
n
= 340) completed questions on CIPN (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20) and HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) before initial treatment (baseline) and 1 and 2 years after diagnosis.
Results
Among chemotherapy-treated patients (
n
= 105), a high sensory peripheral neuropathy (SPN) level was reported by 57% of patients at 1 year, and 47% at 2-year follow-up, whereas a high motor peripheral neuropathy (MPN) level was reported by 47% and 28%, at years 1 and 2, respectively. Linear mixed model analyses showed that SPN and MPN symptoms significantly increased from baseline to 1-year follow-up and did not return to baseline level after 2 years. Patients with a high SPN or MPN level reported a worse global quality of life and a worse physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning compared with those with a low SPN or MPN level.
Conclusions
Future studies should focus on understanding the mechanisms underlying CIPN so targeted interventions can be developed to reduce the impact of CIPN on patient’s lives.
Implications for cancer survivors
Patients need to be informed of both CIPN and the impact on HRQoL.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, VSZLJ, ZAGLJ
Patients with rare cancers (incidence less than 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year) commonly have less treatment opportunities and are understudied at the level of genomic targets. We hypothesized ...that patients with rare cancer benefit from approved anticancer drugs outside their label similar to common cancers.
In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with therapy-refractory metastatic cancers harboring an actionable molecular profile are matched to FDA/European Medicines Agency-approved targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Patients are enrolled in parallel cohorts based on the histologic tumor type, molecular profile and study drug. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥ 16 weeks).
Of 1,145 submitted cases, 500 patients, including 164 patients with rare cancers, started one of the 25 available drugs and were evaluable for treatment outcome. The overall clinical benefit rate was 33% in both the rare cancer and nonrare cancer subgroup. Inactivating alterations of CDKN2A and activating BRAF aberrations were overrepresented in patients with rare cancer compared with nonrare cancers, resulting in more matches to CDK4/6 inhibitors (14% vs. 4%; P ≤ 0.001) or BRAF inhibitors (9% vs. 1%; P ≤ 0.001). Patients with rare cancer treated with small-molecule inhibitors targeting BRAF experienced higher rates of clinical benefit (75%) than the nonrare cancer subgroup.
Comprehensive molecular testing in patients with rare cancers may identify treatment opportunities and clinical benefit similar to patients with common cancers. Our findings highlight the importance of access to broad molecular diagnostics to ensure equal treatment opportunities for all patients with cancer.
Summary Background Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are scarce, with second-line chemotherapy showing only modest activity against the tumour. Despite the absence of well controlled ...trials, bevacizumab is widely used in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Nonetheless, whether the high response rates reported after treatment with this drug translate into an overall survival benefit remains unclear. We report the results of the first randomised controlled phase 2 trial of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. Methods The BELOB trial was an open-label, three-group, multicentre phase 2 study undertaken in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly allocated by a web-based program to treatment with oral lomustine 110 mg/m2 once every 6 weeks, intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, or combination treatment with lomustine 110 mg/m2 every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Randomisation of patients was stratified with a minimisation procedure, in which the stratification factors were centre, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and age. The primary outcome was overall survival at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat. A safety analysis was planned after the first ten patients completed two cycles of 6 weeks in the combination treatment group. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register ( www.trialregister.nl , number NTR1929). Findings Between Dec 11, 2009, and Nov 10, 2011, 153 patients were enrolled. The preplanned safety analysis was done after eight patients had been treated, because of haematological adverse events (three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and two had grade 4 thrombocytopenia) which reduced bevacizumab dose intensity; the lomustine dose in the combination treatment group was thereafter reduced to 90 mg/m2 . Thus, in addition to the eight patients who were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 110 mg/m2 , 51 patients were assigned to receive bevacizumab alone, 47 to receive lomustine alone, and 47 to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 90 mg/m2 . Of these patients, 50 in the bevacizumab alone group, 46 in the lomustine alone group, and 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group were eligible for analyses. 9-month overall survival was 43% (95% CI 29–57) in the lomustine group, 38% (25–51) in the bevacizumab group, 59% (43–72) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group, 87% (39–98) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 110 mg/m2 group, and 63% (49–75) for the combined bevacizumab and lomustine groups. After the reduction in lomustine dose in the combination group, the combined treatment was well tolerated. The most frequent grade 3 or worse toxicities were hypertension (13 26% of 50 patients in the bevacizumab group, three 7% of 46 in the lomustine group, and 11 25% of 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group), fatigue (two 4%, four 9%, and eight 18%), and infections (three 6%, two 4%, and five 11%). At the time of this analysis, 144/148 (97%) of patients had died and three (2%) were still on treatment. Interpretation The combination of bevacizumab and lomustine met prespecified criteria for assessment of this treatment in further phase 3 studies. However, the results in the bevacizumab alone group do not justify further studies of this treatment. Funding Roche Nederland and KWF Kankerbestrijding.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Background:
Results of CheckMate 577 show an improved disease-free survival for patients with resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer treated with adjuvant nivolumab compared with ...placebo (22.4 versus 11.0 months). Population-based data can provide insights in outcomes from clinical practice. The aim of our study was to investigate disease-free and overall survival in a nationwide population aligned with the inclusion criteria of CheckMate 577.
Patients and Methods:
Resected patients with stage II/III esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer (2015–2016) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients with cervical esophageal cancer, irradical resection, or complete pathological response were excluded. Disease-free and overall survival were assessed from 12 weeks after resection using Kaplan-Meier methods. In addition, to adjust for differences in characteristics between CheckMate 577 and our population-based cohort, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison was performed for pathological lymph node status and pathological tumor status.
Results:
We identified 634 patients. Sixty percent of patients were diagnosed with recurrence or were deceased at the end of follow-up. Median disease-free survival was 19.7 months and median overall survival was 32.2 months. After the matching procedure, the median disease-free survival was 17.2 months and median overall survival was 28.2 months.
Conclusions:
Disease-free survival in our population-based study was considerably longer than the placebo population of CheckMate-577 (19.7 versus 11.0 months). Possible explanations are differences in characteristics, quality of esophageal cancer care, or differential strategies for evaluation of recurrence. In the Netherlands postoperative imaging is not part of the standard follow-up as opposed to the standard postoperative imaging in the CheckMate 577 trial. The difference in postoperative imaging could partially explain the longer disease-free survival observed in our study. Quality and optimization of current treatment modalities remain important aspects of esophageal cancer care.
Background
Addition of trastuzumab to first-line palliative chemotherapy in gastroesophageal cancer patients with HER2 overexpression has shown to improve survival. Real-world data on HER2 assessment ...and administration of trastuzumab are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess HER2 testing, trastuzumab administration, and overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients.
Methods
Data of patients with synchronous metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma diagnosed in 2010–2016 that received palliative systemic treatment (
n
= 2846) were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. The ToGA trial criteria were used to determine HER2 overexpression. Proportions of HER2 tested patients were analyzed between hospital volume categories using Chi-square tests, and over time using trend analysis. OS was tested using the Kaplan Meier method with log rank test.
Results
HER2 assessment increased annually, from 18% in 2010 to 88% in 2016 (
P
< 0.01). Median OS increased from 6.9 (2010–2013) to 7.9 months (2014–2016;
P
< 0.05). Between the hospitals, the proportion of tested patients varied between 29–100%, and was higher in high-volume hospitals (
P
< 0.01). Overall, 77% of the HER2 positive patients received trastuzumab. Median OS was higher in patients with positive (8.8 months) and negative (7.4 months) HER2 status, compared to non-tested patients (5.6 months;
P
< 0.05).
Conclusion
Increased determination of HER2 and administration of trastuzumab have changed daily practice management of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients receiving palliative systemic therapy, and possibly contributed to their improved survival. Further increase in awareness of HER2 testing and trastuzumab administration may improve quality of care and patient outcomes.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OBVAL, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Highlights • One fifth of operated colorectal cancer patients will develop metachronous metastases. • Colon and rectal cancer patients have different patterns of metastatic spread. • Median time to ...diagnosis depends on site of metastasis. • The risk for metastases is associated with patient and tumour characteristics.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
The optimal first‐line palliative systemic treatment strategy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer is not well defined. The aim of our study was to explore real‐world use of first‐line systemic ...treatment in esophagogastric cancer and assess the effect of treatment strategy on overall survival (OS), time to failure (TTF) of first‐line treatment and toxicity. We selected synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients treated with systemic therapy (2010–2016) from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 2,204). Systemic treatment strategies were divided into monotherapy, doublet and triplet chemotherapy, and trastuzumab‐containing regimens. Data on OS were available for all patients, on TTF for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 (n = 1,700), and on toxicity for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 (n = 1,221). OS and TTF were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression, with adjustment for relevant tumor and patient characteristics. Up to 45 different systemic treatment regimens were found to be administered, with a median TTF of 4.6 and OS of 7.5 months. Most patients (45%) were treated with doublet chemotherapy; 34% received triplets, 10% monotherapy and 10% a trastuzumab‐containing regimen. The highest median OS was found in patients receiving a trastuzumab‐containing regimen (11.9 months). Triplet chemotherapy showed equal survival rates compared to doublets (OS: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.83–1.02; TTF: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.82–1.04) but significantly more grade 3–5 toxicity than doublets (33% vs. 21%, respectively). In conclusion, heterogeneity of first‐line palliative systemic treatment in metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients is striking. Based on our data, doublet chemotherapy is the preferred treatment strategy because of similar survival and less toxicity compared to triplets.
What's new?
Metastatic esophagogastric cancer can't be cured, but palliative therapy can improve patients’ quality of life and survival. However, there's no consensus regarding the optimal first‐line palliative systemic therapy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer. Here, the authors evaluated real‐world use of first‐line systemic treatments. The retrospective study included a cohort of 2,204 metastatic patients and found 45 different treatment regimens administered. Patients that received doublet and triplet chemotherapy had similar survival, with triplet patients experiencing higher toxicity. Monotherapy produced significantly worse overall survival and only modest reduction in toxicity. These findings support doublet therapy as the optimal first‐line treatment strategy.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
